[enum-wg] Follow up on Jim Reid's presentation - CRUE and relation to IETF work

> But let's assume that happens - what is the semantics of such a SIP
> URI for a) an end user and b) an operator - can I bounce a call to
> sip:number at bt.com if I find  <number> in 4.4.e164.arpa and it returns
> such a registry-entered sip URI? Can I (do I need to?), as a
> end-user, distinguish who entered which record? What if I have a IP
> Interconnect agreement with BT / what if not? I would assume BT might
> have an opinion here.. Tony?

IMHO this could only work, especially in User ENUM, if this
Sip?:number at bt.com;user=phone is used purely to indicate a
Service Provider ID (SPID). The domain name given is not resolvable 
in the public DNS, only within 
the providers DNS (as proposed yesterday by GSMA with the Local
Routing Tables (LRT). 

One way to clearly distinguish from routable SIP entries would
be to use an new enumservice called e.g. SPID to indicate that 
the domain name has to be resolved by other means. 

In this case the users may simply ignore enumservice spid because
they cannot use it.

This enumservise may also be useful in Infrastructure ENUM to
distinguish between ENUM entries routable on the public Internet
and pure SPID entries (e.g. gsmaworld.com)

Richard